My point about the prophet remark was if someone tells you to jump of a bridge, would you do it? If they started calling Henderson a legend enough times, I guess you would agree with that too?
And if Zlatan spending measly 4 years at a club and scoring a lot of goals qualifies him as a Legend then my god, the word has really been cheapened. The fact is people will always try and make their own sound better. They wear their players achievements on their chests like a badge of honor. So will want they biggest shiniest badge, even if that means lying to themselves. Wish I'm not willing to do.
And yes, the word legend is reserved for one club players who are great in their position. Afterall, its the word "legend" not "great player"
There is no logic to these arguments. Jumping off a bridge because someone said to is in now way comparable to accepting that a player is a legend for a particular football.
Likewise, accepting that Jordan Henderson, who has won a single League Cup with Liverpool, is a club legend for them, is a great deal different to accepting that Kenny Dalglish is a club legend for them. Kenny Dalglish who won 6 League Titles an FA Cup, 4 League Cups and 3 European Cups with them as a player, and a further 3 League Titles and 2 FA Cups as a manager.
PSG have won 6 league titles in their entire history, Zlatan was a key part in 4 of them. He's their all-time top goalscorer. Of course he's a club legend for them. As I said, he's synonymous with their rise. Cantona is similarly regarded as a United legend despite only being at the club 5 years. He is intrinsically linked to the rise of the modern Manchester United we associate with success.
The only thing that you're not willing to accept is that you're completely bonkers. A player can only be a club legend if he's great in his position, and played for his boyhood club his whole career? That means great players would have to stay at sub-par teams to be regarded as legends, and lesser players who had the misfortune of growing up supporting one of the giants could never be regarded as club legends because they weren't good enough to play for their boyhood clubs.
Pele played for two clubs, Maradona for five, Best for seventeen, Zidane for four, Luis Ronaldo for seven, Johan Cruyff for six, Beckenbauer for three, Eusebio for nine. Football's history is littered with legendary players who turned out for more than one club.
With your logic, Ronaldo, one of the world's greatest ever players, cannot be considered a legend for anyone because he's played for three clubs. Messi cannot be considered a legend for Barcelona because his boyhood club is Newell's Old Boys.
I respect that you may regard players like Giggs, who were undoubtedly amongst the best in the world for a time and who spent their entire careers at one club at a very high level of the game, with a special status of regard, but to then use that to say that some of the best players to ever grace the game cannot be considered legends because they had the audacity to play for more than one team is one of the most ridiculous attitudes I've ever come across.
You can stop arguing your point now because it's fecking idiotic.
You do realize that blackmail isn't only limited to money, right?
Yes, but if it wasn't money, what is it that he was blackmailing the club for?
